From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-05-22 15:12:55
On 2020-05-22 17:31, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 15:08, Andrey Semashev via Boost
> <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> However, std::deque continues to dynamically allocate chunks as you push
>> and pop elements, even if the average number of enqueued elements stays
>> the same. This is avoided by ring queues.
> Nothing prevents you from using a pool allocator with a deque.
I agree with Peter in that it is a much more complicated solution. It is
likely much less efficient, too. For example, such an allocator has to
be prepared that it will be used to allocate buffers of different types
and sizes, so it will be difficult to predict, which allocations need to
be pooled and which are not. Then the complications from allocator
propagation, rebinding, conversion and comparison. It is easier to
implement a new container than a non-trivial allocator, really.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk